Grandmother and mother accuse Fairfield schools of inaction after alleged student assault; attorney says no charges were filed

Two community members used the public‑comment period at the Feb. 12 Fairfield School Board meeting to allege a teacher physically assaulted a 16‑year‑old student and to press the board for accountability and transparency.

"If any adult outside the school system tackled a child, restrained them with the cord, and dragged them across the floor, that would immediately be treated as assault," said Elaine Schroth, who identified herself as a grandmother and an advocate for the student. She asked the board for information about what investigation was conducted, what standards were applied and what consequences — if any — had been imposed.

Alicia Smith, who identified herself as the student’s mother, told the board the incident occurred about 90 days earlier and that her son now has "diagnosed elevated into severe PTSD, mild depression and anxiety because of what happened." She said the family has not received meaningful protections and disputed the thoroughness of the district’s investigation, citing reports she collected from community members that included allegations of classroom intimidation and misconduct.

School attorney William Kaminski told the board that, according to the administration, the incident was referred immediately to the chief of police and the school resource officer, then to the prosecuting attorney, who "found that no charges were appropriate." He added the matter was referred to the state Department of Children and Family Services, which conducted an inquiry and, in his words, found the allegation "unsubstantiated that there was no child abuse or neglect." Alicia Smith said she disputes aspects of that account and told the board she is meeting with the prosecutor.

President Marilee Keim limited further public response after the allotted three minutes for each speaker expired. Keim also asked Officer Garner (the SRO) to remain close by as the public‑comment period concluded. The parents asked the board to respond in writing to questions about safety measures, the scope of the investigation, interviews conducted and what supports have been offered to the student; those written responses were not provided during the meeting.

The board record shows no additional public action during the meeting on the allegation beyond the public comments and the attorney’s statement. The meeting adjourned at 6:19 p.m.